Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Among Canadians aged 15 to 24, the rate of depression is higher than at any other age, and suicide is the second leading cause of death. The current study provides detailed information about depression and suicidal ideation among young Canadians, including their use of mental health support. DATA AND METHODS: Data from the 2012 Canadian Community Health Survey-Mental Health (CCHS-MH) were used to describe rates and experiences of depression and suicidal ideation among Canadians aged 15 to 24, including psychosocial characteristics of those who had depression or reported suicidal thoughts. Characteristics associated with seeking professional support were also examined. RESULTS: About 11% of Canadians aged 15 to 24 had experienced depression in their lifetime; 7%, in the past year. Approximately 14% reported having had suicidal thoughts in their lifetime; 6%, in the past year. Lifetime depression and suicidal thoughts were moderately correlated (r = .34, p ⟨ .001). Individuals with lifetime depression had more than four times the odds of seeking professional support in the previous year, compared with those who did not have lifetime depression; those with lifetime suicidal thoughts had more than three times the odds of seeking professional support, compared with those who did not have lifetime suicidal thoughts. Psychosocial factors such as negative social interactions and lower perceived ability to deal with stress were associated with depression and suicidal thoughts, although these associations differed for males and females. INTERPRETATION: The findings suggest that many young Canadians have depression and/or suicidal thoughts. Their odds of seeking professional support are significantly high.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".